Preiskel & CoPreiskel & Co
Preiskel & Co
A boutique law firm in London
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Diversity, Social Responsibility, and Pro Bono
  • Services
    • Corporate
    • Commercial
    • Regulatory
    • Competition & Antitrust
    • Data Protection, Privacy, and Retention
    • Intellectual Property
    • Dispute Resolution
    • Employment
  • Sectors
    • Telecommunications
    • IT, Technology, & Internet
    • Media and Broadcasting
    • Websites, Blogging, & Social Media
    • Film & Television
    • Gambling & Online Gaming
    • Leisure & Retail
    • Energy & Minerals
    • Cryptocurrency & Blockchain
    • Creative Industries
  • People
    • Daniel Preiskel
    • Ronnie Preiskel
    • Tim Cowen
    • Jose Saras
    • Robert Dougans
    • Karthyaeni Vittala
    • Tina Cowen
    • Xavier Prida
    • Martina Raciti
    • Ewelina James
    • Rachael Machado
    • Maria Constantin
    • Peter Dally
    • Richard Stewart
    • Joanna Coombs-Huang
    • Paul Stelges
    • Hannah Leader
    • Alison MacFarlane
    • Ilanit Appelfeld
    • Daniel Oakland
    • Sophia Yakhno
    • Sue Warwick
    • D A T Green
    • Antony Corel
    • Stewart White
    • Mor Swiel
    • Stephen Hornsby
    • Tony Curzon-Price
    • Robert Harvey
    • Shardi Shameli
  • International
  • Blog
  • News
    • Publications
  • Contact
Menu back  

Claim against NHS Trust for breach of DPA 1998 and misuse of private information dismissed

April 28, 2022By Preiskel & Co

In October 2017, Mrs. Underwood (the “Claimant”) was approached by a representative of Bounty UK Ltd (“Bounty”), a pregnancy and parenting support company, after giving birth at a hospital within the Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (the “Trust”). The Claimant alleged that the Bounty representative was able to access and read the medical notes at the foot of Mrs. Underwood’s hospital bed in the NHS antenatal maternity ward, which contained personal data about both the Claimant and her newborn son.

As a result, the Claimant claimed that the Trust had failed to take appropriate technical and organisational measures to prevent Bounty from accessing the personal data. On 13 April 2022, UK High Court dismissed the compensation claim made by Mrs. Underwood against the Trust for the breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

The Claimant alleged that the Trust had breached several of the data protection principles under the pre-GDPR UK data protection regime (through culpable omission) by granting Bounty access to the antenatal ward resulting in the Bounty staff obtaining private information about the claimant and her son.

The UK High Court judge ruled that the acts of the Trust, by making available to the Claimant and the Trust’s staff documents necessary for the care and treatment of both the Claimant and her son (i.e., hanging the patient medical chart at the foot of the bed), cannot be regarded as making those documents available to the Bounty representative. There was no evidence that the Trust directly disclosed information to the Bounty representative. Therefore, the Trust was found not liable for the unauthorised (and unlawful) acts of the Bounty representative. The judge further added that a hospital cannot fulfil its role without “making available at least some limited data about patients”.

Please contact Jose Saras if you have any questions regarding the above.

The material contained in this article is only for general review of the topics covered and does not constitute any legal advice. No legal or business decision should be based on its content.

Latest Preiskel & Co blog posts
  • CMA AI Report: The Foundation of the UK’s AI Response
    September 21, 2023
  • Navigating Health Data Compliance: A Roadmap for Employers
    September 21, 2023
  • Transatlantic convergence? Recent cases on advertising and privacy from the USA and UK
    September 15, 2023
  • Practical Guide – Net Neutrality in the UK
    September 14, 2023
  • Virgin succeeded in defending a claim by EE for loss of EE’s profits caused by Virgin’s breach of the MVNO Exclusivity Clause
    September 12, 2023
  • Getting out of a (data) scrape: global statement published for the protection of publicly accessible personal data online
    September 8, 2023
  • The dark side of design: the ICO and CMA call for businesses to rethink their website layouts
    August 18, 2023
  • Could the Supreme Court’s ruling on litigation funding agreements cause havoc for litigation funders?
    August 17, 2023
  • US Threats of a ‘Te(ch)xodus’ from the UK?
    August 17, 2023
  • Smoother Sailing for EU-US Data Transfers after GDPR Adequacy Decision
    August 4, 2023
  • Unlocking Data Flows: EU-US Data Privacy Framework Receives Adequacy Decision
    July 13, 2023
  • UK’s World Leading Approach on Artificial Intelligence – White Paper outlines 5 guideline principles for responsible use of AI
    July 5, 2023

The Preiskel Blog

  • CMA AI Report: The Foundation of the UK’s AI Response 21 Sep 2023
  • Navigating Health Data Compliance: A Roadmap for Employers 21 Sep 2023
  • Transatlantic convergence? Recent cases on advertising and privacy from the USA and UK 15 Sep 2023
  • Practical Guide – Net Neutrality in the UK 14 Sep 2023

Preiskel news

  • Practical Guide – Net Neutrality in the UK
  • Danny Preiskel featured in GCCM Magazine (June/July 2023 issue 55)  
  • Danny Preiskel moderating a panel at the MEF Connects – The Future of Fraud Prevention event (5th September 2023, hybrid)
  • Preiskel & Co advised TMT Analysis on the acquisition of Phronesis Technologies
Preiskel & Co LLP
4 King's Bench Walk,
Temple,
London
EC4Y 7DL
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 7332 5640
Email: info@preiskel.com

Find us on:

TwitterLinkedinMail
© Preiskel & Co LLP 2023 | Site map | Legal notices | Cookie Policy | Privacy